Robert Abela is resolute not to ask for the resignation of ministers Clayton Bartolo and Clint Camilleri, two of his closest cabinet allies, despite the Standards Commissioner finding them guilty of breaching ethics. 

In an interview with Times of Malta, his first in two years, Abela maintains that the circumstances of this case differ fundamentally from those of Justyne Caruana, who resigned as minister in 2020 after revelations of an abusive contract awarded to her partner Daniel Bogdanovic. 

“The facts in this case are different.  The circumstances do not warrant Clayton Bartolo or Clint Camilleri stepping down from their ministerial duties,” he stated firmly.

“[Muscat] worked her full hours, and the Standards Commissioner confirmed this was not a phantom job. The discrepancy lay in the transition from her role as a private secretary to that of a consultant.”

The investigation into Bartolo and Camilleri was carried out following a report filed by Arnold Cassola in February 2022 in which he highlighted favouritism and abuse of power in the employment of Amanda Muscat by the tourism ministry and subsequently with the Gozo ministry. 

The report found that Bartolo and Camilleri abused their power and breached ministerial ethics when Muscat, Bartolo’s then girlfriend, was employed and paid for a job she was not qualified to do.

Asked whether Muscat would be asked to reimburse the money, the prime minister would not say, insisting that the controversy revolves around a €16,000 discrepancy in her pay

The Standards Commissioner found that Muscat was first promoted from Bartolo’s personal assistant to his consultant with a salary of almost €62,000 in 2020 and again, with an even higher salary of €68,000, with Camilleri in 2021. 

She continued to work as Bartolo’s private secretary, but on a much higher, consultant’s pay, even when she was, on paper, employed with Camilleri.

Bartolo and Muscat have since tied the knot.

Abela emphasised that he had terminated Muscat’s contract in 2021, taking action three years before the report’s release.

Asked why the report fails to mention this, Abela said it was because the commissioner never questioned him: “otherwise I would have told him what I know”.

Asked whether Muscat would be asked to reimburse the money, the prime minister would not say, insisting that the controversy revolves around a €16,000 discrepancy in her pay.

During the interview, Abela pointed out to what he claims is the hypocrisy of the Nationalist Party, which has called for a protest outside parliament tomorrow.

“They organise protests about ministerial abuses while their MPs exploit the system over years,” he said, alleging that opposition MP Toni Bezzina “has been receiving an annual salary of €51,000 without attending his workplace”.  

Bezzina is employed by the Public Works Department. 

An interview with Robert Abela: Part 1

In Prime Minister Robert Abela's first interview with Times of Malta in two years, he answers questions about phantom jobs, building permits and Malta's long-term economic vision.

The second part of the interview will be published on Monday. 

Mario Xuereb: Prime Minister, first of all, thank you for agreeing to sit for this interview.

Robert Abela: Thank you for the opportunity, Mario.

MX: Last June, you said you and the Labour Party had listened to the electorate and were ready to make difficult decisions. Now, the Commissioner for Standards has published his findings on ministers Clayton Bartolo and Clint Camilleri concerning the employment of Amanda Muscat. You had the chance to make a difficult decision. Why didn’t you?

RA: I took it three years before the report was released. I terminated Ms Muscat’s employment back in 2021. The Standards Commissioner clearly stated that the complainant’s claim of a phantom job was unfounded. He specifically concluded in his report that the work hours were fulfilled. [Muscat] worked as a private secretary to the minister, fulfilled her hours of work, and the complaint was upheld only in that she transitioned from a private secretary role to that of a consultant.

MX: The Commissioner for Standards found that her employment was terminated upon the expiry of her contract.

RA: I was the one who terminated her employment…

MX: … The report does not state that.

RA: Because I was never asked to provide my testimony. The Commissioner for Standards never called me to give my version of events. Otherwise, I would have presented the facts as I know them. What I see in all of this is the hypocrisy of the Nationalist Party. They’re organising a protest when key members of their parliamentary group are engaged with the Maltese government and consistently fail to show up at their workplaces. Allow me to elaborate.

MX: But let’s leave the Nationalist Party to respond to that. The commissioner’s report highlights a breach of ethics…

RA: I can’t ignore the fact that this report has now reached the parliamentary stage, where the committee will follow its due course and take a decision. However, I must point out the hypocrisy of the Nationalist Party. (MP) Toni Bezzina is employed with the Public Works Department and receives an annual salary of €51,000. Yet, consistently, he fails to attend his workplace and provides no service…

MX: Why don’t you request an investigation, then?

RA: A request for investigation on this was filed with the Commissioner for Standards shortly before this interview started. He [Bezzina] only attends to collect his fuel voucher, which he uses to fill his car with public funds.

MX: But let’s return to the report released by the Standards Commissioner.

RA: The issue remains one of consistency and credibility. Regarding the report, I took action three years before the final report was issued. The key takeaway here is the need for reform in the procedural manual to hire consultants, as it currently does not specify any required qualifications.

MX: But the commissioner found that [Muscat] was not performing consultancy work. She was still employed with the Ministry for Gozo but continued to work as a private secretary with the Ministry for Tourism.

RA: And that’s why a shortcoming was identified. Although the individual worked her full hours, there was no doubt she fell short of fulfilling some responsibilities she was obliged to carry out. The issue lies in the discrepancy between what she was paid for as a private secretary and what she was receiving as a consultant. We heard various figures about this, with claims of an excess of €68,000 per year. I ensured to address the excess between what she worked as a private secretary and what she was entitled to.

The discrepancy isn’t €68,000. It’s €16,000- Prime Minister Robert Abela

MX: Will she [be asked to] reimburse the money?

RA: Let me get to the discrepancy between what she was entitled to and what she actually received. For example, in the case of the Nationalist MP [Bezzina] we’re talking about €51,000 annually over a long period of years. For someone who’s been working much longer than 10 years that adds up to half a million euros…

MX: But what will you do in this [Bartolo/Camilleri] case?

RA: I will answer you. But let me cite another example. A second MP, David Agius, spent years without reporting to his workplace. Permanent secretaries, including in the case of architect Bezzina and Agius, raised questions about why they weren’t showing up to work. David Agius now attends as he sees fit, in a reduced capacity.

MX: But aren’t MPs supposed to have such an arrangement? The reality is that Maltese MPs must balance their work as parliamentarians with their other jobs. Wasn’t this supposed to have been subject to reform? We’ve been talking about having full-time MPs for years but nothing has been done.

RA: It’s not about spending years away from your workplace because you assume the parliamentary role gives you some prerogative to skip your job. That’s abuse – blatant abuse of the parliamentary title – if you’ll allow me to say.

MX: Let me bring you back to the original point.

RA: I understand there’s a specific exemption during parliamentary sittings. But this doesn’t mean you skip your workplace for the entire week. In the case of architect Toni Bezzina, we’re talking about €51,000 annually in taxpayer-funded salary without providing even a cent’s worth of service.

MX: How many requests for investigation have been filed on this?

RA: In the case of architect Bezzina, I’m certain a report has been submitted, as far as I know, and also regarding another Nationalist MP. In contrast, in Amanda Muscat’s case, the discrepancy isn’t €68,000. It’s €16,000. Naturally, this will now progress to the parliamentary committee stage, where further discussion is needed.

MX: So, are you calling for these two ministers [Bartolo and Camilleri] to resign or not? You used the word “consistency”. You can hear people comparing this case with Justyne Caruana’s and they are saying that you acted differently then. Isn’t it a case of two weights, two measures?

RA: Absolutely not, because the circumstances in each case are different and distinct. The facts are not the same. In the case of ministerial responsibilities held by Clayton Bartolo and Clint Camilleri, I’ve already commented that the circumstances of their cases do not warrant them stepping down from their ministerial duties.

MX: Which means that a “sorry” is enough…

RA: The Committee for the Protection of Standards in Public Life must decide whether to adopt the report and whether any additional measures should be taken.

MX: The government has a majority in that committee…

RA: You’re mistaken. The committee has two government MPs and two opposition MPs…

MX: …plus the Speaker’s casting vote, who normally sides with government [on issues like these].

RA: I don’t think it’s fair to suggest that about the Speaker. This reminds me of the opposition leader’s attitude when the Speaker was re-appointed at the start of this legislature. Disparaging comments were made against the Speaker back then. Similar comments were directed at the Commissioner for Standards in Public Life, Judge Emeritus Joseph Azzopardi, who was previously criticised as being ineffective when we proposed him. Now, because the report suits their narrative, he is suddenly agreeable. Soon they’ll revert to saying he’s ineffective or claim he’s in the government’s pocket, as is often the rhetoric aimed at the Speaker.

MX: Has this report cost you politically? Former Labour Minister Evarist Bartolo said the “Labour Party is making a big mistake in thinking people will overlook ministerial abuses because the government delivered a good budget and because the PN remains ineffective.” What’s your reply to that?

RA: I could understand that narrative had I not taken action as I did three years ago. But action was taken. It’s important to remember that this government introduced the Standards Commissioner and the related laws, setting new benchmarks for governance.

MX: Have you anything to say about the timing of the presentation of the Commissioner for Standards’ report, coming as it did with the budget?

RA: But timing... the investigation had been ongoing for three years, so the decision of when to release the report rests solely with the Standards Commissioner. He has his autonomy and independence, and I cannot dictate when he should or shouldn’t publish a report. That is entirely his prerogative. The report is dated October 23, that is a week before the budget, and subsequently was made public by the committee shortly after. I feel very comfortable addressing the report. We’ve done everything required so far, and we still have much to do in the area of good governance.

MX: Let’s move on to Budget 2025. It leaves people with more money in their pockets. But what do you tell those who argue that the budget measures are short-term and lack long-term vision?

RA: Absolutely not. We’ve maintained consistent investment to improve people’s quality of life. Take pensioners, for example. Compared to what they were receiving in 2013, pensions have increased by €70 per week. It’s almost unbelievable that we’ve managed to increase pensions by €70 weekly. The amount we’re investing in pensions will now reach €1.2 billion annually ‒ double what was invested in 2013. This shows the strength of our investment. Likewise, take a middle-class family with an average income and two children. Through tax cuts alone, this is the largest tax cut in our country’s history. Together with increases in children’s allowance, they’ll have €1,800 more annually. We’ve implemented two consecutive increases of €250 in the children’s allowance per child while delivering a tax cut that left €66 million in families’ pockets. Ultimately, we managed to provide an injection of €140 million instead. Every positive budget measure we’ve implemented has been underpinned by the growth of our economy, which has more than doubled since 2013. Back then, the labour market faced unemployment as a significant issue. Today, we have full employment.

MX: What about new economic sectors? Aren’t you milking sectors established 10 years ago?

RA: Take renewable energy, for instance. The investment in GIMAS will bring 44 high-quality jobs and an academy in the renewable energy sector. Isn’t that a new economic niche? We’ve also invested in STMicroelectronics, which is working on a major European automation project classified as a Common European Interest and we were in competition with other countries. Isn’t that new investment? What about traditional niches – like pharmaceuticals, iGaming, and financial services…

We’re not just building on past achievements- Prime Minister Robert Abela

MX: All have been around for quite a while.

RA: They existed, yes. But we’ve strengthened and expanded them. For example, the financial services sector is now employing 18,100 people. Compare this to the 15,000 jobs the opposition says it wants to reach in eight years. They don’t know how many people are in employment in this sector. We’re also creating new niches in areas like MedTech and IT, and in aviation, such as EasyJet’s investment in Malta. So, no, we’re not just building on past achievements; we’ve expanded and diversified significantly.

MX: The government presented the document Vision 2050. Don’t you think a 25-year vision is overly ambitious given how rapidly the world is changing, requiring adjustments every few years?

RA: That’s precisely why the document isn’t static. It takes into account the upheavals we’ve experienced in the last five years – like the pandemic, two wars, inflation, and international energy price hikes. Such challenges shouldn’t force us to constantly play defence. Instead, we need a vision. Twenty-five years may seem long, but in the life of a nation, it’s relatively short. We’ve set clear intermediate targets for 2035 and 2050. This vision isn’t just for the Economy Ministry. It integrates all ministries – energy, health, justice, and others – to address today’s challenges and prepare for future ones. The document will adapt to unforeseen circumstances, but the country must have clear goals.

MX: Moving on to Villa Rosa. Have the changes to the local plan already been negotiated with the developer?

RA: No, there’s still a public consultation process that needs to be followed.

MX: Moviment Graffitti claims that this consultation is just a sham.

RA: Absolutely not. The starting point for Villa Rosa is a site that already has approved and final permits. Forget the local plan review; even before that began, the site was covered by valid development permits.

MX: The local plan changes will make the project bigger, though.

RA: The project will change for the better – not just for the developer but for the country’s tourism product. The inclusion of public spaces was a condition before the Cabinet even considered the review. The discussion now revolves around whether the country wants a tourism product of higher quality, including strong public and open spaces, unlike what was previously permitted.

MX: But the developer will still benefit more.

RA: The developer is making an investment, and naturally, they expect a return. No investor makes an investment without expecting it to yield results.

MX: What quality of life can we expect at St George’s Bay during the construction of this massive project?

RA: The investment will ensure an improved environment once the project is completed. But we must let the process of consultation and permits run its course. There’s no guarantee that all the developer’s wishes will be approved. That is to say, when the entire process of public consultation regarding the local plan and its review is completed, the developer must then start again to obtain permits. These permits would then be considered within the parameters of the revised local plan. There is no guarantee that the permits will be issued or that the Court of Appeal will uphold them. The authority might issue a permit, and the Court of Appeal may decide to uphold it, as we have seen with various projects. However, assuming permits will automatically be issued according to the developer’s wishes is not the case. There is a process for these projects, and I believe we should all have trust in our courts to deliver sensible decisions.

MX: The Labour Party often lays the blame for over-development on the revision to the local plans carried out by the Nationalist government in 2006. But now you’re the one proposing changes to allow more development. Inconsistent?

RA: We’ve already revised local plans to ensure that areas like Bulebel and Ħondoq ir-Rummien remain protected. These revisions prevent detrimental developments that were allowed under the 2006 plans. On Villa Rosa, the opposition leader himself reviewed the project before it reached Cabinet. His response was that he wanted to be the one to cut the ribbon at its inauguration if he became prime minister.

But beyond that, I also think the discussion now should be whether the country, 18 or 19 years down the line, should move towards a holistic review of the local plan for the entire country. I can mention Marsa as an example….

MX: You have already hinted at a holistic review of all local plans. But in which direction?

RA: It will all depend on public consultation. For example, siblings inheriting plots may want to develop them. Would it be fair to stop them from developing that plot by removing it from the development scheme through the revision of the local plans?

MX: Will the revision you are hinting at allow more development?

RA: That depends on the consultation outcomes. Environmentalists may tell you they don’t care about the rights…

MX: As the prime minister of this country, you should be the one providing the compass and establishing what the country can handle.

RA: Let’s focus on the ongoing local plan review currently taking place in Marsa. For me, it remains the dream project that truly encapsulates what I would like to accomplish before the end of my term. To me, it represents the dream of this country. Right now, there is a local plan review process under way, so for those who think that such reviews have never been conducted in this country, or that the first was done for Villa Rosa, they are mistaken. The Marsa local plan review addresses the Enemalta site and extends beyond it as well. So, I ask: should the direction we take involve further investment? Should the potato shed remain in its current dilapidated state, or should we turn it into the country’s finest investment?

MX: But what about our villages, like Qrendi, Safi or Mellieħa, where traditional architecture is being replaced by apartment blocks? Aren’t we losing the character of these towns?

RA: And isn’t that why we provided fiscal incentives to encourage people to preserve the type of properties you’re referring to? It makes no sense, in my view, to have an Urban Conservation Area or a village core where a beautiful 300-year-old house is demolished to build apartments.

MX: Houses in UCAs cannot be demolished in the first place.

RA: I’m giving an example here because we provided incentives to ensure such properties are preserved. We’re talking about exemption in practice – €54,000, which is no small amount – meaning they are completely exempt from tax on the first three-quarters of a million. This excludes the tax on buying and selling as well.

Part 2 of this interview will be published on Monday.